Callafangers wrote: ↑Sun May 04, 2025 8:39 pm
Nessie wrote:That is your opinion. You assert it as if it is fact. When deniers claim there is a lack of grave space for over a million corpses at the camps, they make assumptions to minimise how many corpses could have fitted, ignoring decomposition and crushing under pressure, the lack of clothing, the smaller size of people and the lack of certainty over the actual sizes of the graves. Fact is, those camps have the largest mass grave areas of any mass graves, from any large scale deaths, throughout history. There is evidence from eyewitnesses and documents, to prove how many arrived and were killed at the camps. That what has been found by archaeologists is not as much as you think it should be, is not evidence to prove no mass graves.
Nessie, stop with the 'opinion' dodge. Excavations at AR camps and Chelmno—Sobibor (in the range of 15,000 - 45,000 crushed/compressed corpses' worth), Belzec (low tens of thousands at most), Treblinka (near nothing)—are quantified, not assumed. Even factoring significant decomposition or crushing, remains don’t scale anywhere close to hundreds of thousands or more. 'Largest mass graves in history' means zilch without matching your numbers. Eyewitnesses and docs show arrivals, not proven killings at scale. Archaeologists’ findings are drastically short—orders of magnitude off. Show the hard data for millions, not empty superlatives.
For you to say that at TII, near nothing has been found, when an area that was 2 hectares, up to 7m deep was found to contain cremated human remains, is a clear lie. That is 140,000m3, or the equivalent of 56 Olympic sized swimming pools. That is easily enough space for there to be mass graves at the site. When a geophysical survey finds multiple large pits in the area of the camp where multiple eyewitnesses state mass graves were located, that is corroborating evidence to prove mass graves.
Your motive is to disbelieve, so you play with estimations, to minimise how many people could have been buried at the sites. You do not provide any actual evidence, such as an eyewitness, document, or archaeological survey to back up your lack of grave space claims. Instead, you rely on argument and a logically flawed argument to boot.
Nessie wrote:You think that [witness inconsistencies], but if you bothered to study witnesses and memory, you would see any inconsistencies are within what is to be expected and are explainable, such as hearsay compared to eyewitnesses. They are not inconsistent at all, when it comes to mass arrivals, killing inside chambers, mass graves and pyres. It is in the detail that they vary, such as what killed people inside the chambers and how big the graves were.
I don’t need a lecture on memory. Core contradictions—CO vs. Zyklon B, impossible timelines, absurd logistics—aren’t mere 'details.' Mass arrivals? Not disputed. Gassings and pyres?
Unsubstantiated at scale, with testimonies overwhelmingly collapsing under scrutiny. Consistency on vague claims isn’t proof when specifics fail.
Where’s the fuel or forensic backing for millions cremated? You’re sidestepping the massive gaps.
You do need to know far more than you do about memory and recall. No witness contradicts any other about CO vs Zyklon B, you just made that up. Every single witness at A-B states Zyklon B was used. No worker at an AR camp or Chelmno states Zyklon B was used. The timelines are within what is to be expected, when we are all poor at estimating time and how long events lasted. Your idea of absurd logistics and your arguments from incredulity. Mass arrivals, gas chambers and mass cremations are all corroborated by evidence variosuly from documents, physical remains and circumstances. The gaps are explained by the Nazis destruction of evidence, which in itself is evidence of criminality.
Nessie wrote:In your opinion. In my opinion, what archaeologists have found, is of a scale consistent with mass deaths. There is evidence of fuel. There is witness evidence to ordering and delivering of wood, the use of wood to start the pyres and the corpses being consumed by the fire, as seen by the pyre found at Ohrdruf. The archaeological and witness evidence is consistent with huge mass graves, larger than any others.
Opinion doesn’t conjure remains. Low tens of thousands isn’t 'mass deaths' of millions. The single witness claim of a small wood delivery which you spam repeatedly doesn't pertain to any claimed 'extermination' operations, and there's a total lack of documentary logistics—where’s evidence of the massive logging needed for AR pyres (since logging is explicitly claimed as the foremost source of fuel/wood)? Ohrdruf shows small-scale cremation, not millions. 'Huge mass graves' still don’t yield your quantities. Stop with subjective fluff; show quantified remains and fuel records for millions.
The Nazis left behind as little evidence as possible. You then illogically argue that because you cannot work out how the Nazis got wood to the AR camps and had enough for mass pyres, those pyres never happened.
Nessie wrote:When you make your claims, the burden of proof is on you. When you claim no mass graves, it is not up to me to disprove you, it is up to you to evidence no mass graves. You do that with witness who said there were no mass graves, and site surveys that found undisturbed ground. You cannot do that, so you shift the burden of proof. I have provided concrete evidence to match the numbers, from Nazi documents recording how many went to the camps, to archaeological evidence of huge areas of disturbed ground containing cremated remains.
You’re twisting it again. You claim millions killed—an extraordinary positive assertion. Burden’s on you to prove it with forensics, not on me to disprove a negative. I’m not saying 'no graves'; I’m saying remains don’t match your scale—tens of thousands, not millions. Nazi docs show arrivals, not killings. Your 'disturbed ground' falls short by a mile. Stop deflecting; produce remains or logistics for millions.
You are deflecting, prove, with evidence, not arguement, what really happened inside the AR camps and over a million people being transported back out of those places. A historian or criminal investigator, someone who knows what they are doing, would know how to evidence and prove a claim about mass murder did not happen.
A claim is made that the British gassed German and Italian internees at the camp they were imprisoned in, on the Isle of Man, in 1941-2. How would go about disproving that claim?
Would you argue that the British were not capable of building gas chambers, or that the witnesses description of gassings was too unbelievable to accept? Or, would you gather evidence from witnesses and documents, and conduct a site examination?
Nessie wrote:What else is there? Millions of Jews still in camps and ghettos in 1944, or being released, would leave a lot of evidence. Where is it? It is odd how so many records survive, recording arrests, transports to camps and ghettos, and the populations of those camps and ghettos, but zero records survive of mass releases!
What else? Untracked displacement, labor drafts, chaos-driven obscurity under Soviet control. Not every Jew needed to be 'in camps' or 'released en masse' to vanish from records. Surviving docs cover Nazi control, not chaotic endgame or Soviet suppression. Expecting neat 'release records' in a collapsing Reich is absurd. Burden isn’t my missing paper; it’s your missing proof of death at scale. Show it.
You keep going on about Soviet control, as you ignore 1944. Millions of Jews in camps and ghettos in 1944, would have left a lot of evidence at that time. Holocaust deniers wonder why so little was intercepted at Bletchley about the Holocaust, but why was so little intercepted about the massive drain on resouces guarding and accommodating millions of Jews would cause? Concentrate on the guards, where would they all come from? Where is the evidence of SS staffing levels in 1944, with so many camps and ghettos to guard?
Nessie wrote:How could the Soviets suppress data of c34,000 Dutch Jews still alive in 1944, in camps, or being released, presumably to return to the Netherlands? Same with all the French, Italian, Greek, Belgian, Norwegian, German and Austrian Jews. When you claim no mass murders, the onus is on you to produce witnesses from the camps to say what did happen.
Soviets suppressed data on entire populations—Katyn, famines, gulags. Small groups like Dutch Jews could dissolve in displaced masses or be unrecorded under Soviet grip (and no one is claiming many of them could not have died from various causes during and after the war). I don’t claim 'no murders'; I challenge unproven genocide at your scale. I don’t need witnesses to disprove; you need forensics to prove. Stop dodging—where’s the physical proof for millions dead?
There you go again, ignoring that the Nazis had a huge say in events. The majority of Nazis made sure they were caught by the Western Allies, not the Soviets. The Western Allies were not supporters of the Soviets, so Nazis reporting that they were being lied about by the Soviets, for a mass murder that did not happen, would get a good reception in the West.
Dutch Jews would stand out in the camps, as would all the other nations. You are assuming there were millions of Jews left by the Nazis, to be found by the Soviets, when the opposite is evidenced.
It is a good admisson by you, that you do not claim no murders and instead, you dispute the evidence and demand to be shown it, when you have been repeatedly shown it. That leaves you in a no mans land, proving you are incapable of the basic task of any real investigator.
Stop dodging, where is the physical proof of millions still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944, and liberated in 1945?
Nessie wrote:You are dishonestly minimising the scale of evidence to prove mass killings, to deflect from your lack of evidence of millions of Jews still alive in 1944. Show me the bodies! Where is your evidence of millions of Jews still alive in 1944? If that had happened, there would be a huge number of Nazis whose job it would have been to organise and guard all of those people. Can you name the department and Nazi who was responsible for running all those camps and ghettos?
I’m not minimizing; I’m exposing reality—your 'evidence' (shaky witnesses, sparse remains) doesn’t scale to millions. I don’t need to prove millions alive; you need to prove millions dead. War chaos and Soviet control explain missing data better than unproven gassings. Nazi departments? Irrelevant until you show extermination. Keep flipping the burden; it’s still yours. Show the remains for millions.
Show me the evidence of what happened to the millions of Jews the Nazis arrested, 1939-44. If they were not mass murdered, where were they in 1944?
You cannot show me any evidence. You cannot even name the department or people responsible for keeping them alive. I can name the SS, AR staff, the Einsatzgruppen, the Romanian and Latvian units and individuals, Globocnik, Fuchs, Gerstein and Hofle who were responsible for the killings. I can produce a chronological history of events, you cannot. You have nothing, and you defelct from that by lying I have nothing.
Nessie wrote:Arrests were widespread and involved millions of Jews. What you call localised killings were widespread in Eastern Europe, in particular in the Baltic and Balkan countries and Romania, resulting in the deaths of c 2million Jews. It involved the entire of Nazi Europe, except Denmark and Finland. How did they get to be exempt? Only Denmark and Finland could evidence where their Jewish citizens were in 1944. Explain why that was.
Arrests, yes. Localized killings, yes. Two million? Where’s the forensic evidence? Widespread doesn’t mean industrial genocide via gas chambers. Denmark and Finland’s exemptions stem from local resistance and lesser Nazi focus—small populations, unique politics. Their records don’t prove your broader narrative; they’re outliers. Still no physical proof for millions dead. Show me the remains.
You cannot accurately describe killings that took place across a large part of Europe, from Estonia to Romania to Serbia, as localised. Add to that, the Western and Mediterainian Jews who were transported to that part of Europe and who were killed there.
Denmark and Finland prove that Jews still alive in 1944, leave evidence they were still alive. Why would Norway, Belgium, Holland, France, Luxemberg, Italy, and Greece, who were not part of the Axis, agree to be part of a Holocaust hoax, knowing that Denmark and Finland could get a pass? How did they get their pass and not have to be part of the hoax?
Still no physical remains of millions of Jews in camps and ghettos in 1944 and liberated in 1945.
Nessie wrote:France was a victor, but they admit to their complicity and cooperation in the Holocaust. The Dutch have not re-written their history and they admit to having one of the highest death rates of their citizens, due to their high level of cooperation. The Latvians have had decades to re-write their history, since they gained their independence. But they still admit to joining with the Einsatzgruppen and shooting their Jewish citizens and that was not a Soviet hoax.
Admissions of complicity or local killings don’t prove millions gassed or shot en masse. Post-war politics shaped narratives—victor or not—for guilt, aid, or alignment. Dutch 'high death rates' lack forensics. Latvian admissions confirm local atrocities, not industrial extermination Ultima Thule-level certainty. You’re piling anecdotes, not evidence for your scale. Still no remains or ashes for millions.
All of those countries admitting to their role in the Holcoaust, is indicative of the sheer scale of evidence the Holocaust took place. Meanwhile, you lie repeatedly that there is a lack of evidence for mass grave sites, as a deflection from the genuine lack of evidence of Jews alive in 1944, unless they were Danes or Fins. Then we know where they were. The Jews who were in Nazi custody are the ones who went missing, with the Nazis unable to offer up evidence of them still alive.
Nessie wrote:Until you can evidence millions of Jews alive in camps and ghettos in 1944, or they had been released and were back in the general population, then the evidence produced to prove mass gassings, shootings, graves and cremations stands. That, in your opinion, the evidence produced is insufficient, is just hot air.
Your logic’s still backward. I don’t need to prove millions alive; you must prove millions dead. Your 'evidence'—inconsistent testimonies, minimal remains, no logistics for millions—doesn’t stand; it fails under scrutiny. It’s not just 'opinion'; it’s a factual deficit in physical proof. Call it hot air, but I’m waiting for remains or cremation capacity for millions. Until then, your story’s the empty breeze.
When you claim millions were still alive, it is up to you to evidence that. Since you cannot, you claim they were not killed and demand I prove you wrong.
